DETAILED ACTION
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer filed on February 4, 2026 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration dates of US Pat. No. 12,042,071, Application No. 18/943410, and Application No. 19/013477 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded and the corresponding double patenting rejections are withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The rejections made under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) in the previous Office Action are withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendment, filed February 4, 2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 24-26, 28, and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US PG Pub. No. 2008/0283717) in view of Ahroni (US Pat. No. 4,736,282) and Merrill (US Pat. No. 3,861,629).
Regarding claims 24-26, 28, and 30, Kim teaches an artificial tree that is a collapsible cone tree comprising a mast (104, 104a, 104b, 104c) having a lower first end and an upper second end, a base plate (158) mounted to the first end, a plurality of legs (112), each having a first end mounted to the base plate (114) and an opposite free end, a receiver (unlabeled, flat disk) mounted at about the upper, second end of the mast (104, 104a, 104b, 104c), and a plurality of flexible stringers (106), which may have LED lights (108) mounted thereto and may be LED light strings, extending between the legs’ (112) free ends and the receiver (unlabeled, flat disk) (Fig. 3; par. 18-20, 23, 33).
The teachings of Kim may be considered to differ from the current invention in that the legs in the embodiment discussed above are not explicitly taught to be pivotable as claimed. However, the artificial tree (100) depicted in Figure 3 is cone-shaped and Kim does teach an embodiment wherein the legs can fold together when not in use for convenient storage (par. 26). As shown in Figure 4 and discussed by Kim, one of such folding movements is for the legs (112) to pivot, or “fold up” toward the mast (104a) using a hinge-type connection (Fig. 4; par. 28). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to configure the legs in the embodiment discussed above to be hingedly connected to the base plate such that the legs can pivot toward the mast because Kim explicitly teaches such a structure to be appropriate for his product and in order to allow the legs and tree to be collapsed to a smaller size that is convenient for storage. As such, Kim renders obvious an artificial tree comprising a collapsible cone tree including legs that are pivotable from a closed, storage state to an open, in-use state, wherein the stringers are extended to form the tree into a cone shape.
The teachings of Kim further differ from the current invention in that his stringers, which are LED light strings, are not disclosed to interact with the receiver as claimed. Correspondingly, Kim does not teach a receiver having a structure that can accommodate the claimed light string-receiver relationship as claimed. However, the stringers/light strings (106) in Figure 3 do extend downwardly from the receiver (i.e. the unlabeled disk) (Fig. 3). Ahroni further teaches a donut-shaped collar including a central opening for receiving a tree trunk or other pole-shaped structure that may be incorporated as a part of an ornamental tree top that is used to support a decorative light assembly (Abstract; col. 2, ln. 46-56; col. 4, ln. 27-30; claim 3; Figs. 1-3). As shown in Figures 3 and 4 and discussed by Ahroni, a light string is mounted into the collar by passing the string into a first opening at the perimeter of the collar, bending the string within the collar, and having the string exit at a second opening in the perimeter of the collar that is spaced art along the perimeter from the first opening (i.e. “the openings are spaced about a periphery of the receiver”) (Figs. 3, 4; col. 3, ln. 39-42). Ahroni’s collar is beneficial because it provides a simple and economical way of conveniently draping, arranging, and securing light strings on a Christmas tree or the like (col. 1, ln. 24-27; col. 3, ln. 63-66). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize Ahroni’s donut-shaped collar with a central opening as a receiver on the tree of Kim, wherein the upper, second end of the mast inserts into the opening of the collar and wherein a light string (i.e. “stringer”) is arranged within the collar as claimed, because the collar provides a simple and economical way of conveniently draping, arranging, and securing light strings on a Christmas tree or other structure, allows for a cone-shaped Christmas tree to be assembled with a single light string (if desired), as shown in Ahroni’s Fig. 2, and is compatible with the structure described by Kim.
The teachings of Kim also differ from the current invention in that the LED light strings in his product are not taught to be attached to the legs’ free ends by coil spring biasing elements that maintain the light strings in tension. However, Kim does teach that the flexible light strings, which are flexible, can connect to the legs with connecting mechanisms and connectors other than what is exemplified (par. 23, 30). Kim also refers to his stringers as “outer supports” and teaches that his outer supports provide structural stability (par. 20, 23). Merrill further teaches tensioning flexible cords that are intended to support a tree between the trunk and legs in a device for supporting a Christmas tree using tension springs in order to effectively connect the extremities of the legs with the trunk of the tree (i.e. or “mast”) to be supported via the set of cords (col. 3, ln. 51-62). As shown in Figure 2, Merrill’s tension springs (54) are coil springs (Fig. 2). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize coil springs (i.e. “biasing elements”) to attach the supportive stringers to the legs in Kim’s tree, wherein the springs maintain the stringers in tension, because Merrill teaches tensioning supportive cords for trees and discloses that coil springs are useful in effectively connecting the cords between the shaft of a tree and legs at the base of a tree, as is done with Kim’s tree, thereby providing support to the tree.
Claim 31 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim, Ahroni, and Merrill, as applied to claim 24 above, and further in view of Klein (US Pat. No. 5,673,893).
Regarding claim 31, the teachings of the cited prior art differ from the current invention in that none discloses securing the springs discussed above to the ends of the legs using eyelets. However, as discussed above, Kim teaches that the light strings, which are flexible, can connect to the legs with connecting mechanisms and connectors other than what is exemplified and Merrill, who generally discusses tree stands (Abstract), renders obvious utilizing coil springs in such a connection. Klein also teaches a tree stand including coil springs and teaches attaching his coil springs to other portions of the structure using eyelets (col. 5, ln. 7-11). As shown in Figures 1 and 4, Klein’s eyelets (72) are involved in supporting a suspended canister (20), which supports the weight of a tree (Figs. 1, 4; col. 2, ln 10-13), thereby demonstrating that eyelets can be used to form strong, mechanically robust connections. Klein also discloses that the materials used to make his product, which includes the eyelets, are low in cost, thereby making his product economically available to the buying public (col. 2, ln. 59-65). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use eyelets to secure the coil spring biasing elements to the free ends of the legs in the product of the combined prior art because Klein teaches that eyelets are a useful and effective means of securing coil springs to other structures in products, such as products in the Christmas tree art, that are low-cost and economically available to the public and demonstrates that such connections are strong and mechanically robust.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed February 4, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant has argued that claim 24, as now amended, is distinguished over the cited prior art because it recites “flexible stringers”, which Applicant has alleged Kim does not teach. However, Applicant’s argument is not persuasive because, in discussing the structure of Figure 3 in paragraph 23, Kim states that “the Christmas tree 100 has outer supports 106 that can be made of a flexible, long, narrow material such as an electrical wire with insulation. The outer supports 106 can support, secure, and provide electrical power to lighting components 108.” Therefore, Kim teaches “flexible stringers” that are light strings, which meet the claim requirements.
Applicant has also argued that it would not have been obvious to combine Ahroni’s receiver or Merrill’s springs with Kim’s product because Kim’s stringers are rigid, which would damage the operability of the product. However, these arguments are not persuasive because, as discussed above, Kim explicitly teaches using flexible materials for his stringers. It would have been obvious to apply Ahroni and Merrill’s teachings to Kim’s product for the reasons discussed above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JULIA L RUMMEL whose telephone number is (571)272-6288. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday, 8:30 am -5:00 pm PT.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Humera Sheikh can be reached at (571) 272-0604. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JULIA L. RUMMEL/
Examiner
Art Unit 1784
/HUMERA N. SHEIKH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1784
Prosecution Insights